Subject: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-kucherawy-sender-auth-header-17.txt

From: Suresh Krishnan <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 02 Dec 2008 19:12:47 -0500

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for
draft-kucherawy-sender-auth-header-17.txt

For background on Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at
<http://www.alvestrand.no/ietf/gen/art/gen-art-FAQ.html>.

Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments
you may receive.

Summary: This draft is ready for publication as a Proposed Standard but
I have some comments.

Meta Comment
============

One thing that was unclear to me was how the MUA would convey the
results to the user. e.g. Using the case C.5. in the appendix, what
would the user actually see (Success indication/Failure
indication/Something else)? Is this field used more as input for filters
rather than communicating authentication information to the user? I
would have a hard time establishing the authenticity of the sender given
that I know nothing about the (relative) strengths of the authentication
methods present in the header.

Editorial
=========

* Section 1.1 Point 3.

Replace

"Create an extensible framework for reporting new authentication
methods as such emerge;"

with

"Create an extensible framework for reporting new authentication
methods as they emerge;"

* Sections 2.4.1 and 2.4.3

s/unlikley/unlikely/

* Section 2.4.5

s/authenicated/authenticated/

* Section 8.1 5

s/compilant/compliant/

Cheers
Suresh

_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art